|
|
|
|
|
by yellowapple
3294 days ago
|
|
You don't have to stutter for your point to be logically inconsistent to the point of incomprehensibility. Lorem ipsum is nonsensical faux-Latin regardless of any speech impediments. If ChromeOS or Android don't count as "real" Linux desktops because (aside from Android not usually being used for desktops) they abstract away the "Linux" part, then by your exact same logic, any Linux distro that ships with a full-fledged desktop environment is not a "real" Linux desktop, either, since they by design abstract away the Linux part. In fact, literally no actual operating system could possibly be a Linux desktop unless we want to go ahead and turn all user software into kernel modules, since literally anything in userspace is by definition an abstraction on top of Linux. Linux is one component in a fully-featured operating system. Exactly which userland happens to be running on top of it does not change one's status as a Linux user. Meanwhile, pretty much every desktop environment for Linux (except maybe recent versions of GNOME) is not exclusive to Linux, so by the logic you've presented, there's literally no such thing as a "real" Linux desktop. |
|
That may be the simplest answer, but when people talk about "the year of Linux on the desktop" they're talking about something in particular, right? Or does any Linux system count? Android smart TVs? Routers? Mall kiosks? Car infotainment systems? Bluray players where the only interface is a Java program? Or are we only counting systems where we can drop to a shell? In which case, do we only count Android phones that let you install bash, or only ones that can be rooted, or do we count them all?
It's not a logical inconsistency, and it's not incomprehensible. It's a simple question: at what point do you differentiate "it runs on Linux" from "it's Linux on the desktop"? Because if my router counts, Linux won a long time ago.